hmm, true... the comparisson with robbing a bank was exaggerated (and technically -in context of law- not correct). But I needed something strong to get the point across
When most people speak in these contexts of altering MSN Messenger (in any way) and the word "illegal" is used, I almost am certain they all mean 'illegal' as in breaking the contract which you accepted when you use the program.
In terms of law and all, this word "illegal" is indeed not the same and it is debatable in court, as "illegal" is a word used in reference to law, and it is not a law you're braking but a contract between you and the program maker.
But this said (and thus, I fully agree with you on this matter), I bet that now people are going to say and understand all this as patching is very legal to do (people simply think that way and/or take it that way), ... hence my use of a strong comparisson and not so technically correct (in every detail) description. (
the end/result justifies the means).
------
quote:
Originally posted by tehGspider
I thought it was loaders that were "grey" & that "soft" patching & "hard" patching were each as bad as each other.
A loader almost always loads a program and then patches some stuff in memory (so the program runs, so the game score is froozen, so you can cheat, etc... ) aka the exact definition of a "soft" patch.
/ 
